After reviewing the first papers assigned for my class, I came to the realization that I needed to focus more on method; divorcing one’s faith from one’s analysis of a text can be a difficult task, especially at this level. And looking at some of the more foundational texts for modern Christianity compounds the role further. Incongruities in Genesis are much easier to accept for the Christian apologist, as that is more a Jewish text, which provides a built-in “out” for them when dealing with the text.
The book of Daniel proves slightly more problematic, as it purports to tell of the end times, which have obviously not occured yet. Getting students to accept the probability that the text is a product of the Maccabean revolt rather than the Babylonian exile is one thing. Getting them to acknowledge that the text reads as a message to the Maccabees rather than as a long-drawn out prophecy still active today is another.
The problem only compounds when moving into the New Testament literature. There is a certain level of critical disbelief necessary to dealing with the gospels and other NT evidence. This is the stuff that most students are going to feel most strongly about. My task is to get them to approach the subject matter from the most objective place possible, and to allow the text to speak for itself as much as possible. Does Paul seem to believe that he will be alive when the end of the world happens? Does the early Christian community share the belief that the second coming will take place any day now, and certainly within that generation? Does the author of Revelations aim his message to the church in the far-flung future or to a contemporary community undergoing persecution? The text would seem to provide answers to all of these questions. Unfortunately, the answers found are not the ones that devout Christians would expect to find.
The issue of support between the “Old Testament” and the New Testament is another issue. The passage Matthew selects - Isiah 7:14 “A virgin shall give birth and shall call the child Immanuel.” - is a correct citation, but completely removed from its context with no evidence to suggest anything but a bounded prophecy aimed at King Ahaz somewhere in the 7th century BCE. These are problematic issues for the apologetic student.
Its an issue that I anticipate having to face as long as I stick with this field. The subject matter I’ve chosen is inherently controversial (which, I admit, adds to its appeal). I don’t see this sort of attachment occuring in other departments, outside of a few specific examples. Biology and evolution? Possible problem. Geology and the age of the world? Possible problem. But are there any students whose entire worldview could be shaken by something discussed in a math class? Does an education class have the potential to affect something foundational to someone’s self-image? I’m not knocking those fields, or attempting to overstate the importance of mine - I’m just working through this as a reality which I need to deal with.
The entire methodology of my field is going to be inherently offensive to many of my students, because I’m not willing to take “God” for an answer.